I most certainly do not know what you mean, if you use the "collective right" nonsense to refer to anything other than the ignorant claims by tyrannical courts that no individual has standing to challenge gun laws using their protection which is explicit in the Second Amendment.
You persisted in previous discussions to insist that the Supreme Court's Miller decision could free Miller and yet not be an "individual right" decision. You persisted in trying to claim that it was the shotgun that was protected. Words have meaning. You can't just adopt any meaning you want.
Of course. Nor a "collective right" decision.
Miller was charged, under the NFA, with not paying the tax. He was not charged with possession of the shotgun. The case was whether the tax on the shotgun was constitutional.
The Miller court couldn't decide that until they knew whether it was a Militia-type weapon or not -- the implication obviously being that only Militia-type weapons are protected from infringement by the second amendment.
IF it could have been shown to the U.S. Supreme Court that Miller's sawed-off shotgun was indeed a Militia-type weapon, then the NFA would have been ruled unconstitutional, the charges dropped, and Miller freed.
The U.S. Supreme Court need not go any farther than that.